Nonetheless, the colonies and post-Revolutionary War period in America included basic mortgage loans. Eventually, in the 1900s, these loans grew in popularity and necessity. Homes, condos, and bare land was more expensive and unaffordable for the working classes. Increasingly, people needed financial support to invest in real estate — to find shelter.

Thankfully, banks were available to help everyone out. Without financial institutions and their mortgages, it’s unclear what would’ve happened. In today’s economy and real estate market, most people are unable to afford a house without credit. On the surface, it seems that many Americans would be homeless or forced to forever rent — unable to own. We’re forced to choose mortgages without a substantial alternative.

But let’s hypothesize for a moment. What would happen if mortgages suddenly disappeared? What if they weren’t an option for the impoverished, working classes, or even middle classes of America? What if banks were unable to write even one more loan?

For starters, it’s likely the entire real estate market would collapse. The decimation of domestic markets would domino throughout the world, and cause an economic meltdown. People would be unable to eat, shop, or pay for their continued existence. Landowners would quickly benefit from skyrocketing rental prices, but huge swaths of population would be forced to seek shelter elsewhere. The working classes would need to leave en masse from cities.

The end of mortgages would spell destruction and terror for the financial institutions that profit from their existence. Banks — big and small — would go belly up. Insurance companies would cease to exist. And a slew of related industries would (i.e., from appraisers to real estate agencies to utility companies) struggle to continue. The stock market would follow the steep declines elsewhere as the economic engine would slow to a halt. Money would be stuck. Over time, trillions of dollars would disappear — poof! — from the world markets. They wouldn’t return, either.

My, how powerful a few documents can be! Imagine how one contract prevents global catastrophe — end times. Moreover, that this agreement separates people behind walls — street and shelter.

Mortgage loans make little sense, though. The continued propping up of home prices through financial instruments ensures working classes spend the rest of their lives working. Renting isn’t much better either. With little incentive to build affordable housing for working classes, builders have increasingly constructed luxury condos for upper middle classes and beyond. A recent Yahoo Finance article highlights this shift:

“…a growing number of Americans must spend more than 30 percent of their income on rent — a level that the government considers financially burdensome. Over the past decade, that number has jumped from 14.8 million to 21.3 million, or 49 percent of all renters.

“A surge in apartment construction has done little to help address this problem because in many metro areas, a large proportion of new apartments are concentrated at higher-income levels. The median rent on a newly built apartment was $1,372 a month in 2014, about $500 more a month than what about half of renters could afford without being financially burdened.”

This story exemplifies the catch-22 for working classes: either fork over astronomical, burdensome amounts in rent or “purchase” a home through mortgage loans. Either way, banks and other financial institutions are complicit in the bubble. They own your future. Unless you’re independently wealthy, you lose.

Increased access to capital through mortgage loans encourages people to buy bigger homes than need at prices they can’t afford. Homebuilders respond by building bigger homes and charge more for new developments. Families and households buy more to fill bigger homes, as well. The cycle is vicious, expensive, motivated by consumption, and facilitated by an endless supply of cheap money via the Federal Reserve. It’s the antithesis of minimalism, frugality, and simple living, but we have little choice than to participate.

As the story continues, wholesale gentrification of vulnerable communities can occur. Those with poor credit and/or unable to make down or monthly payments must vacate. To refuse the paradigm means leaving good neighborhoods and schools. Home prices are propped and buoyed by the continued investments of the masses. Banks encourage people to spend more than they can afford on spaces larger than they need. And all I can think is, “Who were these mortgages meant to benefit?”

A mortgage is less a contract with your bank, and more a contract with your employer. To take out a 30-year mortgage loan is a financial conscription to work. It’s a benefit to your employer and guarantee for decades. You can’t stop working, as the consequence would be disastrous. Mortgage loans are the perfect economic engine for the wealthiest of our economy. They can make vast sums from borrowers and sit back to watch their money multiply.

Sadly, we’ve accepted these rules. We’ve cozied up to banks and pledged to pay them back for half our remaining lives.We’ve played the game by repeatedly checking FICO scores. We’ve shown them our good credit (when possible) as examples of personal responsibility, when it says nothing of systemic bias, racism, and uncontrolled job loss.

We are left with few choices. I dream of resisting the system and regularly think about living in a van or tiny home, but I’m afraid my partner and family wouldn’t care for this reality.

As a future psychologist, I’ll be lucky to make $65,000 to $75,000 to start out, which would necessitate participation in the mortgage loan game. And this says nothing of the student loan debt that would be necessary to pay off six years of doctoral education.

No house could be purchased outright unless I worked for decades and lived in a passenger van in the meantime. Yet, one of the most fundamental psychological needs is shelter. Without it, we cannot talk about saving money, cooking at home, or living well. People need the safety of shelter, but over the centuries, our homes have ballooned in price and size. Our inflated budgets have been decimated by a simple financial tool that we accept as a necessity for existence.

Nobody seems to bat an eye. Nobody says this is senseless. Nobody resists the status quo. Rent or “buy,” the same trap is set.

So, as preposterous and provocative as it might sound, what if we killed mortgage loans?

Share This:

Should you buy a pair of Warby Parker prescription glasses?

Ugh, I’ve been delaying the inevitable: I need new prescription glasses. My old ones are scratched, beat up, and my eyes have changed over the last few years. I can’t wait any longer, but I’ve had a difficult time finding a frugal and fashionable pair of prescription glasses.

80% of the market is owned by one company

If you venture into any LensCrafters, Pearle Vision, Target Optical, and/or Sears, you’ll find a curious coincidence: The brands and price structure are the same. An Italian-based company, Luxottica, is behind most of the prescription glasses you’ll find at those stores. With a crushing grip on production and sales, the company dominates the margins and swarms consumers. In fact, they own 80% of world’s major eyewear brands.

Over the years, I’ve supported this company – whether I wanted to or not. They own brands like Oakley, Ray-Ban, and Oliver Peoples, while making co-branded products for Burberry, Coach, and many other companies. Chances are, you’ve helped the company’s bottom line.

Say hello to Warby Parker

While I wanted something frugal and fashionable, I thought I’d have to sacrifice and buy a no-name, standard frame. Fortunately, I found a growing company that’s mixing up the glasses market: Warby Parker.

The founders of Warby Parker realized the aforementioned fact – that one company has near-complete pricing power – and decided to throw a wrench in the system. They used their Wharton Business School education to analyze the supply chain and found a Chinese glasses manufacturer (the same one as Luxxotica) to make their frames. Now, the company is run like a tech titan and has even received a variety of angel investments and seed money.

Their business model is reminiscent of Zappos.com. Customers can purchase frames online, upload a copy of their vision prescription, and in a few days the frames are yours. Likewise, their customer service handled all my questions in a respectable and timely manner. But there’s more that makes Warby Parker unique.

Free, at-home try on and returns

This is what my Warby Parker at-home try on kit looked like!

Without vision insurance benefits for a new pair of glasses or lenses, I wasn’t able to find much in my price range before Warby Parker. Unlike Luxxotica’s exotic pricing, most WP frames are about $95, ship free, and include premium lenses (anti-reflective and scratch resistant).

What about trying them on before you spend the money? All you have to do is browse through their website, pick up to 5 frames, and they’ll ship them to you to try on.

When I received my package about four days later, I immediately tried them all on and picked a pair that worked for me. I packed the container, with the five frames, and shipped it back via UPS, hopped online to their website and purchased the exact one I wanted.

The process could not be more convenient – you get prescription frames direct to your doorstep! I’m exceptionally happy about the experience and will purchase again.

Do you know of any other places you can get frugal and fashionable prescription glasses?

Update: Just received my brand new pair of Warby Parker prescription glasses! The entire experience was flawless and the glasses are awesome. I will definitely be choosing this frugal option again!

Share This:

College campuses are hotbeds for new technologies, fads, and styles. Over the last couple semesters I’ve noticed a sizeable uptick in people wearing fitness trackers. These sleek, bracelet-like devices can track your steps, calories burned, food eaten, exercise routines, and sleep habits. Many can wirelessly sync to computers and smartphones.

Fitness trackers have long intrigued me, as a runner and frequent exerciser. Personally, I think the feedback would be helpful and encourage more healthy routines. I’ve seen both athletic and overweight populations wearing them. They seem perfectly suited to both populations’ needs. Despite these ample benefits, I haven’t purchased one because I think they should be free.

Photo: brianac37/flickr

Insurance Companies Want Healthy Consumers

Health insurance costs escalated rapidly in recent years. Far surpassing inflation and comparable countries’ medical costs per capita, health coverage is a thorn for many individuals and small businesses. At times, the price of quality health care can be hard to come by if you’re on a tight budget.

Certain health provider groups started catering to athletes and highly-active individuals a few years ago. By developing a niche group of actuarially healthy individuals, the company could lower the cost of everyone’s premiums. Quite simply, it’s profitable for health insurers to encourage healthy choices in their clients.

Let’s Use Fiction To Inspire

Last year, Dave Eggers published his latest novel entitled, The Circle. Set in San Francisco and other parts of Northern California, the book takes the reader on a journey around a company that largely resembles Google. It’s a tech savvy, forward thinking company, that aims to collect everything and give people access to all the world’s information. Despite being insanely creepy at times, The Circle introduces some brilliant tech revolutions.

The one that is most apropos to this article is about a fitness tracker health insurance program. A free part of having this imaginary company’s health insurance is the access to one of these devices. It’s always on and managing your heart rate, calories burned, and tracking your sleep. The device is given at no cost to the employees because they can manage and encourage healthier habits – helping people live longer and cutting costs in heart-related procedures.

The Perfect Price Is Free

I have a serious bias because I’d like a fitness tracker. I think it would encourage me to exercise more regularly and eat healthier. Recognizing and tracking the strengths and weaknesses in your activity choices could positively influence much of the countries heart-related complications.

Ideally, health insurers will recognize the financial appeal of such devices and encourage certain clientele to use these trackers. By encouraging people to engage in more healthy behavior and connecting it with a financially solvent future, it may make the impetus and desire to exercise more potent.

The perfect price is free. This would eventually be a win-win for consumers, innovators, and the health insurers. This leap into technology has been stifled by prices that tend to be over $100 for trackers. As prices begin to decline (inevitably with all technology), fitness trackers may be a more easy choice for everyone involved.

Have you thought about getting a fitness tracker? Would you like your medical insurance to offer a free one?